Gus Dur's 'doublespeak' a worrying sign

Gus Dur's 'doublespeak' a worrying sign

By Donna K. Woodward

MEDAN (JP): It is not only Gen. Wiranto who is on trial. The
credibility of the Indonesian reform movement, in the person of
President Abdurrahman Wahid, is at a crossroads. For weeks the
President, known as Gus Dur, has played with the foreign media
and the Indonesian people, using one set of words to calm the
international community and another to appease the shamed but
still-feared Gen. Wiranto, last the coordinating minister for
political affairs and security, and his supporters.

One cannot help but draw parallels to ex-president Soeharto's
1997 conduct when he made promise after promise to the
International Monetary Fund to implement certain reforms, while
taking countersteps calculated to protect his position.

President Abdurrahman's motives are unquestionably purer and
more patriotic, but his methods seem all too familiar to those,
who since 1997 have watched the political, financial and business
leaders of the country avoid meaningful reform.

Such methods have been: make verbal commitments to democracy
and clean government, but postpone action if there is opposition
from close colleagues (also known as cronies). When pressured for
follow-up, agree to something different from what was originally
promised. Avoid decisive action and tolerate cronies' failure to
support agreed-upon goals. When criticized for failure to keep
the original commitment, rationalize the need for compromise.
Refuse to account for the failure to keep the original promise.

Will these tactics work for President Abdurrahman Wahid, or
for Indonesia?

When former president B.J. Habibie used this strategy,
criticism came quickly because Habibie was distrusted. But
because people trust President Abdurrahman, the tactics are
accepted. It may be natural to accept questionable action in
leaders we like, but it is dangerous. It is a harbinger of the
cult of personality. And that leads to the breakdown of political
accountability.

Soeharto and Sukarno before him were admired, even sincerely
beloved by the people for years. But their presidencies outlived
the incumbents' genuine contributions to the country. At some
point both men fell victim to personality cults that made even
intelligent followers blind to their flaws and destructive
political and economic policies. Advisors were blind first to
small wrongs, then to larger horrors.

Each president was excused of accountability for his actions
or omissions because of people's blind trust in their leadership.
Excused first for small wrongs, then for larger horrors. Is
history repeating itself?

President Abdurrahman and Vice President Megawati
Soekarnoputri are charismatic, beloved figures. The President
has demonstrated his deft political instincts and has already
accomplished the major feat of holding the country together in
the sensitive days following the presidential election.
Nevertheless: should his use of confusing, deceptive
"doublespeak", so reminiscent of Soeharto's, be indulged?

Misuse of language to placate the people is corrupting. It is
the tiny first step down the path of tyranny -- the reason
freedom of speech and press are so important in a democracy.

To keep the political situation involving the government-
sanctioned Commission of Inquiry into Human Rights Violations
(KPP-HAM) in East Timor versus Wiranto under control, President
Abdurrahman has resorted to the use of doublespeak.

This is a sad, troubling sign in a man who seems so truly
devoted to the national good. Sukarno and even Soeharto were at
first devoted to Indonesia's good. Should even a good man be
permitted to use corrupt tactics in the name of political
expediency? Isn't this what Abdurrahman did when he used verbal
sleight of hand -- verbal corruption -- to explain why Wiranto
was still to remain in the Cabinet?

President Abdurrahman seems on the verge of sacrificing his
international credibility for the sake of a soldier undeserving
of such a sacrifice, a military officer who does not have the
courage and honor to fight his legal battles on the proper
battlefield and on their merits, but insists on clothing
himself in the protective armor of a Cabinet post.

Without accountability of public officials as the first
principle of public service, only brute force or money
politics are options of social control. President Abdurrahman has
arrived at a key junction in the journey toward democracy.

Now he and Indonesia will be judged by how steadfastly he
adheres to democratic principles such as civilian control of the
military. So far, the President seems to be losing the battle for
democracy to his rogue general.

The writer is an attorney and former American diplomat at the
U.S. Consulate General in Medan.